Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    December 5, 2014 5:00am-5:31am PST

5:00 am
should look like and also the comment of quality of life open ralph other possible mitigations if you want to tall call them that i think the idea of traffic calming or changing and had of the configuration of the swaigs sidewalk that could happen through the impact fees or whatever process and that might not be able to catch up with one project that's a lot of desire for a continuance i'm not i would hope the commission can talk about what we are seeking from the developer if we continue it's not clear there's any one simple solution >> commissioner moore. >> i like to weigh in support of a continuance not partially because i've here but it puts
5:01 am
this commission in a awkward roll a policy that summarizes the policy is a kicker for me less than twenty-four hours ahead of us discussing this is for me an issue that same guidance was not provided to us a few weeks ago when we continued the idea of the south van ness project i have to rely on fair balanced and inbiased and properly delivered instructions i believe that there is an overview and first go around an van ness or the department south has to pull this together in order to break the grid recognize if it's the case this discussion wyoming should be scheduled not brought
5:02 am
forward as policy because policy and i revised out of the discussion from the commission and the department didn't make policy and technically all the things be forwarded should be weighed i can't use that particular summary today to pass judgment on this particular project and because that's a short timeframe we were not given the guidance so i'll ask for continuance. >> thank you commissioner antonini. >> yeah. i'm inclined to agree with the speaker towards the ends what are we're going to gain although i'm not going to be opted to it because of two reasons if it's a motion the first reason we have supervisors
5:03 am
question the second reason the point was made the memo which we received last night was not a lot of time to respond although that's a genetic thing we i know u knew with the sidewalks was we're talking about two different things but i semiemphasize with people that point more time to digest that i think the question has been answered in his mind we've got to alternatives and the 1 is ralph street you already have 2 hundred cars in the parking lot it's not like there is no traffic at all and most of in and out on the same day we'll have fewer cars with the new development that will replace the parking lot and other ways i hope this is taken up by staff and public as if we do have a continuance someone spoke will a
5:04 am
raised sidewalk from fulsome on the ralph it is a city street it's 50 feet wide it is one way to slow traffic or speed bumps that keep people from going quickly that might be a good thing to have when you have families and children you don't want cars going quickly those are things to be looked in the interim if this year's a continuance and i wag we've had different discussions on different projects specifically 1515 street that put it on a businessier street an van ness and there's good reasons for the decisions and good reasons for the decision and you have to take into account the things like brainwash that was brought
5:05 am
by the owner of brainwash an entrance off fulsome more tire some this is a good project it brings a lot of good things to that area and i pretty much made up my mind on the position of the driveway but receptive to those who need nor time to consider but if there's a continuance i'll not want to see that beyond december 18th. >> commissioner richards. >> since the answer to the question what is there 0 gave him i had a lot of stuff in my brain when i guy tells us how much he lot of you, we have a supervisor asking for continuances a continuance a new policy of 10 pages it's called
5:06 am
policy i thought we asked to have a say in and the first meeting with the neighborhoods e neighbors was yesterday that doesn't sound a trust worthy approach so i don't want to get into the specifics i like the project but i found myself wasting the public trust by not asking for a continuance, sir can you let us know what led up to the meeting. >> so the initial correspondence on the garage issue was in a february but the department determination on what we were going to recommend or - didn't come until october coinciding with the document or the processing of the initial plan and that's the reason you were not meeting. >> i was under the impression.
5:07 am
>> i make a motion to continue for until december 18th. >> second. >> second. >> commissioner hillis. >> i mean, i'm okay with the continuance but where should the garage go i felt like actually it is summarizing there's great places people don't want garages in commercial streets and alleys so pit them off to the side they're not interacting with the bikes or traffic that makes sense it's a dead space i think there are reasons to take it off rachel and put that on fulsome streets there's reaps not to
5:08 am
have it on fulsome i want to ask the architect if i put the garage on fulsome street where would you put it and could i put up the plan and shows you if we want to move the garage where would you put it on fulsome street it has to go someplace and i'll have to reconfigure the ground floor. >> it is going to come up so we have looked at it we have looked at all locations on fulsome and if it was to be on fulsome the only place to do it at the top edge of the street i don't think the city will allow the driveways where the curb ways can be to intersections and it could split the retail too much.
5:09 am
>> those are two retail spaces; right? >> their place holders. >> how big is that space. >> 55 hundred square feet and can you have that. >> i mean. >> it will be split where the split occurs will evolve. >> right so it's possible not to put it you could split the retail and put the garage between the two retail spaces. >> the total width is one hundred and 3 that feet along fulsome i'm not a traffic expert i'm worried if we split the difference it will be too close to ralph to me it would be the northern side of the diagram. >> okay. if you go envoy you looked at i know you've
5:10 am
mentioned a caveat corridor if you put it could you move it to an additional location open ralph across the street on ralph there are two larger apartment buildings with their garage entrances on rachel. >> yes. >> is that possible to move that garage towards fulsome behind the retail and still have a circulation on the ground floor. >> as i mentioned if you start the garage to the right as you can see the gray zone represents the ramps it is the height so minimal moving that urge you to split the project on the right. >> the only way behind the retail. >> that's correct. >> again we were woishd worried upper getting too close to the
5:11 am
intersection of ralph's. >> that's an enormous problem how large are the apartment building across the street on ralph i think i don't know. i think good people of ralph should think about it two it's not as simple you don't want a curb cut on ralph street but banning about when the buildings their garages on ralph street one of the problems i imagine the traffic is not residential homes on ralph street people passing through and cutting through on the way to mission i think one of the reasons they patios pass through it looks at inviting and
5:12 am
part of the problem not on ralph there is blight so it looks like the street is witnesseder so, i mean one thought during the continuance with commissioner president wu it doesn't get narrow eras you get past the development if i put the garage on ralph street to match the sidewalk that it continues on mission street ralph street would not be an inviting street to drive down when you limit the amount of people you know like me who are looking to get to mission street and go down ralph street you without the possibility of parole if it felt more narrow and you have to go slow i hope those are the things we look at if it's on ralph street how to improve it there's an impact on full name street
5:13 am
that will effect fulsome to have live letter retail so it's not good to have curb cuts in retail corridors not nice in residential alleys but there's ways to mitigate against the effects of both i'll keep on open mind in the continuance how to make it street more narrow i don't know if there's an ability to do a incline to widen the street on ralph's in front of that building. >> director ram. >> just a couple of comments that memo there's no new policy it simple descriptions all the
5:14 am
existing policies and inner hollering driveways are a bad idea we have conflicts that pedestrians there's no new policy the second thing the plan in and of itself recognized this conflict it says that driveways should be discouraged in alleys it recognizes that full name is a main street and recognizes that the conflict so it's exactly the same delightful in many projects on van ness and other streets there's also a case by case analyze that as someone said the lessor of evils that's the thing about the project i would say that i think the distance from the intersection is something that is important to mta in terms of backing up into the street when a car is backing up and stopping on fulsome the location of the
5:15 am
driveway has to be subjective distance from ralph and fulsome. >> commissioner johnson. >> thank you very much my comments are arbitrate shorter director ram help me out i wasable not pleased to get a long document but once i read this is not saying anything we don't know only documents we have looked at and to me it's a lot of words to say things we have to look at project by project basis and ralph's versus side streets that are adjacent to it meaning 7th and 8th there are weighs and types we would have this conversation if ralph was on the outside
5:16 am
unfortunately, i want to make sure for myself i didn't treat the provision of the explanation of the red herring or even to adjust my reading the document my discussions with various people i felt like it adds up to an educated look at this project sites i notwithstanding what i said about article 2 i don't support a continuance the only reason as a many voices as we're heard a couch that support a driveway on raphael and as much were not in support of ralph but fulsome many were it was a 50 split in the documents and other correspondence i've read it all and explanations on both sides i
5:17 am
spelling your last again as commissioners said if we ask for a continuance december 18th we h have to get distribution on what is it for in my mind i don't see what happened into two weeks article 2 is clear 4 weeks the planning department have a meeting with people that very specific documents and other times continuance with let's talk about this go i don't understand what we want the planning department to do and meet between two sides with opposing argument with they're two positions so that's the reason i don't support of the continuance not alleged public outreach and on the decision of the policy again, i support it but i don't think it is - it is
5:18 am
just a bunch of documents if we want to have that agenda discussion i absolutely would like people to go to the planning department and discuss that item particularly if it impacts the future but i don't think it impacts this today i have a question for the project sponsor because i'm not sure in my business discussions on another issue on the project this is across two zoning. >> yes. >> zoning codes and r.c. t and another one. >> i till it crows the two in addition to that there's guidance it says you should split up the building and make the massing the block less massive as you go down the street i think you wanted your
5:19 am
design to look at that by having two buildings next to each each other and what you could do about it you did something with coloring you did building the space i know you didn't have too much about the zoning city of chicago out already this changes the face of the building but to me it didn't read as two different buildings it read as one building where you changed the color on one side to read as something different one hundred feet my suggestion to you would be that our purpose is to break up the massing the building with two faces go for it and make them different so i'll ask you to respond to that and what you
5:20 am
might consider responding to that notion. >> could we first settle the issue of continuance this is starting to bifurcate this is an interesting project and it is interesting to discuss but it is the discussion as to whether or not the policies are followed relate to the memo to the time it came in. >> we need to resolve that on its own it is just, fair to the importance of having this settled with respect to the supervisor the kind of thing to do i'm sorry for being strong. >> i feeling this is the only thing i want to address and not
5:21 am
come back again with the response. >> i will note that we vote on the continuance this item is closed so for the time is now. >> i'll join you in that discussion. >> i'm sorry commissioner president wu is it is closed but if agendized again. >> at the next hearing. >> okay commissioner fong. >> so initially i'm not in support of continuance but a little bit long to me the must be has concerned if it helps to inform the neighbors of the options i'm okay with that but i'm not in support of the continuance bus currently there's a parking lot about 45 percent of cars in and out of that space currently on r57 so i
5:22 am
don't think it's a serious serious problem now i don't know how much worse thoits it's going to get it's narrow i understand that a lot of the deliveries in the ups was from city lights is it so begun now i want to make mention commissioner richards saying he was stuck downtown in selma. >> selma. >> fulsome is a thoroughfare for san francisco i think the traffic conditions are not going to get better in my opinion keeping the veins and arteries in san francisco is important when we have a chance to duck off and not block a thoroughfare when we see whole foods an franklin and trade joe's it
5:23 am
makes things up and keeping the author fairs and dedicating those streets automobile movement all of p them going by directional it's invent for the folks in the city but taking ralph it is for the flow of the city. >> commissioner richards. >> so i need one more vote for a continuance i think to us the memo that come out yesterday probably makes sense but put ourselves in those folks shoes that are sophisticated or have the experience the 10 page memo that came out they ended up at 4 o'clock and in the rain i'll get into in a minute puts them as at a disadvantage the second
5:24 am
one over the conditions i had a difference of opinion with the gentleman on what the issue is i was told one hundred and 34 cars across the street as i shadow there in the rain with the neighbors there was a car going bay by every 20 seconds and ten seconds and a lot of them came from 0 people on fulsome and to get out of jams and the alleys that's further east and didn't want to get into the jam they crossed fulsome and someone came out of a parking lot it was a real mess it's really not the units that are causing the issue i probably stand by that i shadow out there in 6 or 11 at night i said to the gentleman you may have a
5:25 am
difference of opinion but i'm not saying i want the garage move forward when i come back in three weeks i think some kind of a count of traffic mini studies where we can mitigate it if we put the garage an ralph is a good thing we're talking about putting the garage on fulsome in its current state we're envisioning the garage open fulsome i don't know if we have a future conditions what is that going to look like so i don't see scrape come back with a couple of options with the option on ralph and come back with a garage on fulsome if in the future and come on why it
5:26 am
doesn't work and lay it out for why it doesn't work and i hope to have an intelligent conversation in three weeks. >> commissioner hillis. >> i agree there's - i think the problem on ralph is not caused by the residents on ralph that'd be much impacted but there are ways to reduce the traffic on ralph that can be done it can be linked to the development i hope that will happen in the interim couple weeks and the issue of mta i get frustrated because mta says do put entrances but the cars are not coming and going an ralph if so garage is on ralph you've got to turn on -
5:27 am
>> you howard. >> you're coming off fulsome not coming on ralph your ending up on the ralph ralph is probably where i would prefer the garage but i think there are things that can be done your problem is bigger than this project. >> i'll add a couple of thoughts i can support the continuance but i don't it falls on the developer i see things detailed in the paperwork even the neighbors that don't want the driveway on ralph i don't know it's a collective effort to come up with ways to make ralph a better street at the end i will probably think that ralph is the better location for the driveway it
5:28 am
doesn't set a precedence it's widower then the alleys it is 50 feet many others between thirty feet i think that the housing and the frontage that being property for ralph adds a lively hood to ralph that's deserved the pedestrian on ralph the articulation of the residential units on ralph adding adds to the livelyness of the alleyway so i know i started asking you you know the commission to consider the specific apps of everyone the most specific one is the department developer and accident community can meet at least one more time i don't know we can copy with solutions not an in kind agreement i believe that takes longer
5:29 am
commissioner antonini. >> yeah. i'll support the continuance and hope we can gain the following things traffic calming open ralph and specifically maybe widower sidewalks and raised sidewalk if we could do it i don't know if we can maybe other departments making a raised sidewalk from 1 city street to another but that would discourage people from coming down there and speed bimgz will slow down the traffic we need to discuss at least one of the people that testified it was one of the ones that didn't want the entrance on ralph also said she was very support of project sponsor having the requested number of prashz at 84
5:30 am
and staff says 72 we have to look at the parking garage demand in the area the neighborhoods will tell you if they have cars or not and people coming through the additional looking for parking space and circling around a million times to avoid paying for a parking meter and finally could take a look at fulsome and if there's at least proposed position where a driveway could be of it's the lessor choice we could say this could be here as too close to the corner or the parking on brainwash all the reasons it can't be done but certainly we'll have to see where

3 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on